Indexes Released!!!!!!!!
- Thread starter Shane Heckel
- Start date
Can you run a intercooler in that class at the 1300 hp stated hp level. you can’t in comp
I totally understand the sentiment after the AA/SM deal. We need to not let that happen again, it was not the people that ran the class , they just went by some generous rules but NHRA never gives back, look at C/T its still to tough an index and it never has been given any index back. B/ND might be in that same boat .
I am not a turbo guy , and don’t pretend to understand this type car , but I believe that if comp is to survive it needs to have spectator popular classes to bring in the interest , spectator popularity , and possibly more opportunities for class contingencies , or we could be the next on the block.
I would love to bring in a diesel index,, but I still do not have enough data to write a fair set of rules. So I’m looking at these turbo classes in a dragster, something at least I’m a little more educated in.
I think that we need to limit hp in these motors to keep them alive. The lack of an intercooler I’m told kills these in the hp department, so would gasoline, but with gas its also kills reliability. I would think that the single 76 mm turbo in the I /D four cylinder class will hold hp down power to 900 total
Also I have just found out that I have been confused and all backwards on this I was along with a few others thinking H/D and meant I /D which is a four cylinder class NHRA added weight to H dragster, it was 9.8 now its 11.
H/D now 11lbs my thoughts, and please correct me if you know more about this. The single 74 mm turbo will really kill the hp on these motors, I’m told down to something in the neighborhoods of 1100 hp, the twin 54 is not as good as the single 74, again I’m told. With a 1500 lbs minimum, the average motor in these class are 180 to 210 cid, so the car will with a 180 cid motor weigh in at 1980 and 1100 to 1200 hp, how fast would that go that’s about the same weight as a B/D with a 500 cid Shane how fast would this go ,my guess would be that 100 to 200 hp less then a B/D so 6.80 needing an index of 7.40
I/D 14 lbs 76 mm turbo most motors in this type motor are 130 cid so that is 1820 lbs with 850 to 950 hp how fast some one , I come up with 7.20 max needing a 7.80
index
H/D - 9.80 or more pounds per cubic inch; 1,800-pound minimum;
turbocharged, 6-cylinder, 4-valve engines only.
I/D - 14.00 or more pounds per cubic inch; 1,700-pound minimum;
turbocharged, 4-cylinder, 4 valve engines only.
I totally understand the sentiment after the AA/SM deal. We need to not let that happen again, it was not the people that ran the class , they just went by some generous rules but NHRA never gives back, look at C/T its still to tough an index and it never has been given any index back. B/ND might be in that same boat .
I am not a turbo guy , and don’t pretend to understand this type car , but I believe that if comp is to survive it needs to have spectator popular classes to bring in the interest , spectator popularity , and possibly more opportunities for class contingencies , or we could be the next on the block.
I would love to bring in a diesel index,, but I still do not have enough data to write a fair set of rules. So I’m looking at these turbo classes in a dragster, something at least I’m a little more educated in.
I think that we need to limit hp in these motors to keep them alive. The lack of an intercooler I’m told kills these in the hp department, so would gasoline, but with gas its also kills reliability. I would think that the single 76 mm turbo in the I /D four cylinder class will hold hp down power to 900 total
Also I have just found out that I have been confused and all backwards on this I was along with a few others thinking H/D and meant I /D which is a four cylinder class NHRA added weight to H dragster, it was 9.8 now its 11.
H/D now 11lbs my thoughts, and please correct me if you know more about this. The single 74 mm turbo will really kill the hp on these motors, I’m told down to something in the neighborhoods of 1100 hp, the twin 54 is not as good as the single 74, again I’m told. With a 1500 lbs minimum, the average motor in these class are 180 to 210 cid, so the car will with a 180 cid motor weigh in at 1980 and 1100 to 1200 hp, how fast would that go that’s about the same weight as a B/D with a 500 cid Shane how fast would this go ,my guess would be that 100 to 200 hp less then a B/D so 6.80 needing an index of 7.40
I/D 14 lbs 76 mm turbo most motors in this type motor are 130 cid so that is 1820 lbs with 850 to 950 hp how fast some one , I come up with 7.20 max needing a 7.80
index
H/D - 9.80 or more pounds per cubic inch; 1,800-pound minimum;
turbocharged, 6-cylinder, 4-valve engines only.
I/D - 14.00 or more pounds per cubic inch; 1,700-pound minimum;
turbocharged, 4-cylinder, 4 valve engines only.
Thats my thoughts.....................I dont see a reason for an "automatic"60 to 70 under class! Build the car,prove its a roach and then ask for help.I really would like to see some new guys in the class,but lets not kick the guys who have raced NHRA for years in the ass to do it ,AGAIN!!!!!!!!I dont see turbo technology going away anytime soon so lets see how this all pans out,if its going in a bad direction then do something,until then, spool them up and let them eat!
Greg,
In regards to the popularity and marketability of Comp, bringing on a few new classes is not going to fix this overnight. Sure there will be some folks who will follow the turbo cars because of their uniqueness, but it is not a total solution. Part of the answer is what Rodger and Shane started in D4, and what Frank Aragona and myself are also doing in D1. We need to start promoting the class ourselves, not relying on someone else to do it for us. But it needs to be a total commitment by everyone, not just a handful. We already had plenty to offer as far as diversity and interest before the new additions. We have proven that sponsors will get involved, and we'd like to see the NHRA appoint someone solely for the purpose of garnering more sponsor interest for all sportsman classes. Ultimately, showcasing the individuals and cars is what will bring more fan appeal, and eventually make us all that much more visible.
By the way, I agree 100% with Shane. Who says every new class is supposed to be -60 or more as soon as the ink dries in the rulebook?
Don Eckel 111
In regards to the popularity and marketability of Comp, bringing on a few new classes is not going to fix this overnight. Sure there will be some folks who will follow the turbo cars because of their uniqueness, but it is not a total solution. Part of the answer is what Rodger and Shane started in D4, and what Frank Aragona and myself are also doing in D1. We need to start promoting the class ourselves, not relying on someone else to do it for us. But it needs to be a total commitment by everyone, not just a handful. We already had plenty to offer as far as diversity and interest before the new additions. We have proven that sponsors will get involved, and we'd like to see the NHRA appoint someone solely for the purpose of garnering more sponsor interest for all sportsman classes. Ultimately, showcasing the individuals and cars is what will bring more fan appeal, and eventually make us all that much more visible.
By the way, I agree 100% with Shane. Who says every new class is supposed to be -60 or more as soon as the ink dries in the rulebook?
Don Eckel 111
debut point
i think it is better to have a new class debut at .45-.55 under max, then 'work' their way into the .60 under club.
bottom line, .60 under should be earned, not an entitlement.
the racers that have been around and supported comp since it's beginnings shouldn't continually get kicked with these new indexes/classes so a few 'new' race cars can be gained.
if you want to talk about things killing comp, i think one is new classes, then new classes getting handed soft indexes. comp always has, and always will be participant driven. while it has potential to gain more of a fan following than it has now, any impact new turbo and sport compact type classes won't 'save' the class. if any one thing is going to help the class it is to let the CIC system do it's job and police the class. it keeps getting circumvented by soft new class indexes and racers jumping classes.
the racers that have supported comp is what will continue to maintain comp and are the racers that should be catered to. if a new racer wants to run comp, there are plenty of options that already exist.
i just don't buy into the theory that sport compact type combo's will save comp. now that the powers that be have included them in comp, i welcome them to the class and hope they get a fair shake, but i just don't think that fan is going to cross over from a fast'n'furious type show to following comp elim. honestly, i don't think that is the real reasoning behind opening these classes. i think their sport compact series is hurting and now they have an out to put those cars.
that being said if some of the points on here are correct, if someone builds one of these cars and debuts at two races at .20 under, then i will campaign for them to get more index.
like i said above, i think the ideal debut point would be .45 to .50 under your first race out. i don't know too many people that drop a new combination together and nail it first trip out. the hp may be there, but between getting your converter/clutch, tires, weight, etc right, there is usually a tenth or more on the table.
aside from buying combos or rides, how many racers put their own program together in a conventional class and went .60 under the first year.
bottom line we need to get the class where new racers get in to race the class and not a soft index.
i think it is better to have a new class debut at .45-.55 under max, then 'work' their way into the .60 under club.
bottom line, .60 under should be earned, not an entitlement.
the racers that have been around and supported comp since it's beginnings shouldn't continually get kicked with these new indexes/classes so a few 'new' race cars can be gained.
if you want to talk about things killing comp, i think one is new classes, then new classes getting handed soft indexes. comp always has, and always will be participant driven. while it has potential to gain more of a fan following than it has now, any impact new turbo and sport compact type classes won't 'save' the class. if any one thing is going to help the class it is to let the CIC system do it's job and police the class. it keeps getting circumvented by soft new class indexes and racers jumping classes.
the racers that have supported comp is what will continue to maintain comp and are the racers that should be catered to. if a new racer wants to run comp, there are plenty of options that already exist.
i just don't buy into the theory that sport compact type combo's will save comp. now that the powers that be have included them in comp, i welcome them to the class and hope they get a fair shake, but i just don't think that fan is going to cross over from a fast'n'furious type show to following comp elim. honestly, i don't think that is the real reasoning behind opening these classes. i think their sport compact series is hurting and now they have an out to put those cars.
that being said if some of the points on here are correct, if someone builds one of these cars and debuts at two races at .20 under, then i will campaign for them to get more index.
like i said above, i think the ideal debut point would be .45 to .50 under your first race out. i don't know too many people that drop a new combination together and nail it first trip out. the hp may be there, but between getting your converter/clutch, tires, weight, etc right, there is usually a tenth or more on the table.
aside from buying combos or rides, how many racers put their own program together in a conventional class and went .60 under the first year.
bottom line we need to get the class where new racers get in to race the class and not a soft index.
I agree 100% with you. I was just hoping that NHRA would release an index that could be competative to start with. Not dominant, just competative. I would have loved to run the V-6 because of all the parts I have. Oh well. My true love still is 500CI engines. I am sure I will struggle with the A/D class. If it was easy, the class would have 2000 cars. Good luck to all.
Matt
Matt
2070 with 1300hp should run quicker than a Pro Stocker. Doesn't it have more torque as well? 7.10 looks good to me.
A/D and H/D both have a 7.10 index.
An "A/D" has to way 1700# with a 500" engine that makes 1400+ HP.
A "H/D" has to weight 2077# with a 212" engine that makes 1300+ HP.
That is my logic.
Maybe I am missing something? I am just trying to shed some light of what i know(and that is not very much!!)
An "A/D" has to way 1700# with a 500" engine that makes 1400+ HP.
A "H/D" has to weight 2077# with a 212" engine that makes 1300+ HP.
That is my logic.
Maybe I am missing something? I am just trying to shed some light of what i know(and that is not very much!!)
That’s the problem, everyone that owns a door car uses a dream wheel. If that were the case a B/DA would run 6.20 and a A/DA would run 6.0 so shouldn't we ask that those easy indexes’ be made 6.60 and 6.80 , its just that it doesn’t work that way a dragster is very dirty in the air, and will not run with a door car.
NHRA is wasting their time, no one will spend the money if its a 40 under class, heck just get a C/ED Why shouldn’t it come out like A/DA or B/DA as a .60 or. 70 under class, and let it get cut down after a few races. By that time a few races have been won, and possible a championship is on its way like AA/SM
example of that logic A 500 inch ProStock will run 6.60 right , well a B/D is 350 lbs lighter then a Pro Stocker so it should run 40 tenths quicker right
now take a A/DA and its really a A/ED with 50 more hp , and the same index , how that even fair , every A/ED in the country now has a extra .10 or 2 , but it doesn’t work that way , more power doesn’t always get down the track and with the 11 lbs per cube the 212 motor will weigh 2332
NHRA is wasting their time, no one will spend the money if its a 40 under class, heck just get a C/ED Why shouldn’t it come out like A/DA or B/DA as a .60 or. 70 under class, and let it get cut down after a few races. By that time a few races have been won, and possible a championship is on its way like AA/SM
example of that logic A 500 inch ProStock will run 6.60 right , well a B/D is 350 lbs lighter then a Pro Stocker so it should run 40 tenths quicker right
now take a A/DA and its really a A/ED with 50 more hp , and the same index , how that even fair , every A/ED in the country now has a extra .10 or 2 , but it doesn’t work that way , more power doesn’t always get down the track and with the 11 lbs per cube the 212 motor will weigh 2332
Dirty Air, that is interesting. Check the dream wheel and lets see how fast Top Fuelers would be if they had bodies on them? Bet they would go in the 3's don't you think?
: I would like to know where your going to put 600lbs. of weight on these HD we have had problems putting 160 lbs. on our CDA you cant just add that much weight,it will break in half at Vegas or Rusk when they hit bumps at 1000ft. these cars are going to get somebody killed.and if its to light it wont stay on the ground.
I would like to know where your going to put 600lbs. of weight on these HD we have had problems putting 160 lbs. on our CDA you cant just add that much weight,it will break in half at Vegas or Rusk when they hit bumps at 1000ft. these cars are going to get somebody killed.and if its to light it wont stay on the ground.
Greg I wouldnt put it that hard. You honestly think an A/ED will have an extra .10-2. Dream on, I think they made it pretty close on those indexes. it might be 2-4 hundreths better but I dont believe a .10-.20 If thats the case then your saying an A/DA will out run an A/D and trust me that wont happen.
That was using the dream wheel the same consideration should be given to a new class. But if the weights the same for a A/DA and A/ED and the index is the almost the Same. 7.20 vs. 7.23 then you add second carburetor and dry sump, how much power is that. And how much would that effect ET
These turbo dragsters will not all be “outsiders” as it seems the attitude is , but at least three comp racers , I think we should use good judgment and make a index at least as comparable as the automatic dragster class, and make it where someone in a good car in average air can run .60 under , . If that’s two easy then it will not take long for the “outsiders” to hit it a few times as we have seen in the past.
These turbo dragsters will not all be “outsiders” as it seems the attitude is , but at least three comp racers , I think we should use good judgment and make a index at least as comparable as the automatic dragster class, and make it where someone in a good car in average air can run .60 under , . If that’s two easy then it will not take long for the “outsiders” to hit it a few times as we have seen in the past.
The problem is just the amount of cylinder pressure with "stock" blocks and heads. It would be like trying to use a 1984 passenger block instead of a bowtie block or similar. And then make it out of the cheapest, most pourous, aluminum you can. If they would allow aftermarket blocks, things could be different.
At 32# and less boost, we never had a problem, but would only run 7.0-7.1
Being it is a V-6, the crank only has 4 Mains to distribute the load.
The best choice would be the Inline 6 cylinder. The 2JZ Engine has a cast iron block with 7 mains. The weak link there is head gaskets.
Personnet went 6.42 i believe with his. (2350# and around 60# boost)-BIG turbo -91mm I think.
At 32# and less boost, we never had a problem, but would only run 7.0-7.1
Being it is a V-6, the crank only has 4 Mains to distribute the load.
The best choice would be the Inline 6 cylinder. The 2JZ Engine has a cast iron block with 7 mains. The weak link there is head gaskets.
Personnet went 6.42 i believe with his. (2350# and around 60# boost)-BIG turbo -91mm I think.
Mat with a pair or 54mm turbo’s or one 74 mm turbo and no intercooler , what kind of power can we really expect out of these motors and if the new weight break is 11 lbs , and I don’t know where that came from , The rule book is 9.8 . Could you give us how small a size motor you could get down to and an hp estimate for that size motor and the corresponding weight? With that number we could arrive at a reasonable index,
Most of the people I have talked to feel that these may not even run the index, and therefore no top people will build one, sad that these indexes should be just lined thru in the rule book as dead.
We all know that index is never gives back, and no one builds unless it’s a soft class and by soft I mean it should be at least as soft as the new Gas Dragster Automatic classes, anyone want to complain about those. We don’t want a .80 under class, but it should , if built right, perform at least as good as a B/DA will run, on a good track and average day
We all know that index is never gives back, and no one builds unless it’s a soft class and by soft I mean it should be at least as soft as the new Gas Dragster Automatic classes, anyone want to complain about those. We don’t want a .80 under class, but it should , if built right, perform at least as good as a B/DA will run, on a good track and average day
